“For more than 100 years, Scouting’s focus has been on working together to deliver the nation’s foremost youth program of character development and values-based leadership training. Scouting has always been in an ongoing dialogue with the Scouting family to determine what is in the best interest of the organization and the young people we serve.

“Currently, the BSA is discussing potentially removing the national membership restriction regarding sexual orientation. This would mean there would no longer be any national policy regarding sexual orientation, and the chartered organizations that oversee and deliver Scouting would accept membership and select leaders consistent with each organization’s mission, principles, or religious beliefs. BSA members and parents would be able to choose a local unit that best meets the needs of their families.

“The policy change under discussion would allow the religious, civic, or educational organizations that oversee and deliver Scouting to determine how to address this issue. The Boy Scouts would not, under any circumstances, dictate a position to units, members, or parents. Under this proposed policy, the BSA would not require any chartered organization to act in ways inconsistent with that organization’s mission, principles, or religious beliefs.”

Wow, that's a relief. The BSA is devolving its responsibilities to community level bigotry and exclusion criteria. That should help a lot. Let's just hope some of these communities will be MORE inclusive, and not less. However I am not holding my breath!

“For more than 100 years, ...bla bla bla....This would mean there would no longer be any national policy regarding sexual orientation...

Yet reading further down "...bla bla bla..... The Boy Scouts would not, under any circumstances, dictate a position to units, members, or parents."

If there will "no longer be a national policy" [of discrimination] it is disingenuous to then proclaim that "...The Boy Scouts would not, under any circumstances, dictate a position..." Well, you Did for the past 100 years.

It seems that Deron has a bit of a problem with continuity and tracking.

It's interesting and sad how many posts there are in this thread that are really just ventings blurted in deliberate ignorance. Well, if it makes you feel better spittin' in the wind, I guess it's cheap therapy.

To the actual news topic at hand, the potential movement IS quite significant: BSA National had just "reaffirmed" the policies on homosexuality and religiosity and now, only months after a pretty firm statement that seemed to foreshadow a whole not of no-progress, the statement published above in this thread suggests a massive change. If it is adopted, there will certainly be units across the country that immediately "come out" with non-discrimination policies they've already been acting upon in contravention of the National policy. Of course, there will be other units that stay as-is. De Colores.

Now, to some folks, perhaps more accustomed to reading between the lines and around either applause or crisis words, there's a very important aspect to the potential change: it shifts liability to the local unit and charter organization. Perhaps the meaning of that is better discussed by Scouters (rather than folks that are only commenting on the applause/crisis topic) who will have to navigate this in the future, if it becomes "so".

"Perhaps the meaning of that is better discussed by Scouters (rather than folks that are only commenting on the applause/crisis topic) who will have to navigate this in the future, if it becomes "so".

"I guess that, at this point, we wait a day and find out what happens."

BPL is brutal and far ranging. I doubt you would have had this array of views, or the layers of implications, from a couple of 2 hour meetings within the Scouting community. When it comes to a discussion at the local level, you will have the advantage.

BSA headquarters, tail between its legs, has already passed the buck. (What a fine example of Leadership.) I wouldn't sit back and wait. I'd be plotting and planning.

When you donate to BSA through, for instance, CFC it goes to the national level. Some of that will filter down to bigoted troops. Thus, BSA will still never get one cent from me. If they feel that they can function without my support- all the more power to them. Go ahead. That's just the way it is- they have a right, but so do I. I choose not to support them in any way. I don't know why the bigots on this board get so bent and defensive about that. Go on about you're business- I certainly am. But if BSA is SMART they'll see the writing on the wall and drop the bigotry. I'd be all for ending the government leases of Boy Scout camps, as well as all of the facilities they use free of charge on military bases. If they want to accept government largess, then they have to accept the government's rules. That's just the way it is. For years Lousianna did without federal infrastructure funding bbecause they didn't want to raise their legal drinking age.

If I can figure a way to benefit a non-bigoted troop and screw national, I guess I would.

For people who say that anyone who is otherwise excluded can pick a different organization than BSA, well, they're being petulant and disingenuous. There is no realistic competeter to BSA in the United States, either in resources or prestige. Everyone knows what you're talking about when you say you're an Eagle Scout. Claim that you're in CampfireUSA and you get a big "Huh?"

Girl Scouts is a very different animal. Thank God that I have a daughter and no son- I would NEVER allow my son into BSA.

I don't doubt that the sudden change of heart comes after major corporate donors have pulled or postponed their donations because of the Boy Scouts' exclusion policy for Gays. In the last six months, those companies include UPS, United Way, the Merck Company Foundation and the Intel Foundation (one of the biggest donors).

"Perry, the author of the book "On My Honor: Why the American Values of the Boy Scouts Are Worth Fighting For," said in a speech Saturday that "to have popular culture impact 100 years of their standards is inappropriate."

Looks like they won't make a decision until May at the earliest. My guess is they were testing the waters to see public reaction, and will now slowly & quietly back away from changing policy. Definitely a hot button issue. Regardless of my feelings on homosexuality, I do think the BSA has the right to include & exclude whomever they desire provided it doesn't violate any state or federal laws.